In Episode 46 of Razorleaf’s Stay Sharp podcast, The Overlap Between MBD and PLM, co-hosts Jen Ferello and Jonathan Scott are joined once again by a good friend of the podcast, Jennifer Herron from Action Engineering. In previous podcasts, Jennifer, Jen, and Jonathan discussed the definition of MBD, the differences between MBD and model-based engineering (MBE), and the challenges around implementing them (see Episode 34: Models Beyond Engineering and Episode 39: Navigating Change in a Model Based World). This time, the trio dives into how the two systems and approaches overlap, what to focus on when making the two work together, and if the implementation order matters.
The Intersection of MBD and PLM
In the simplest terms, Jennifer says, MBD and PLM overlap in the arena of data management, saying “Model-based definition is data that needs to be configuration managed. It needs data management.” That’s because MBD isn’t a file of information about a product or part at just a single point in time. It’s keeping that product data updated and integrated with all relevant data over a lifecycle. Which of course is where PLM excels.
Jennifer adds that once manufacturers have MBD data, they have to contend with, “I can do other things with that data, and so how do we control all that data now? And I think that’s where the overlap [between PLM and MBD] comes in at a high level.” MBD requires a system like PLM because the information in the model is always going to evolve.
Jonathan expands on the criticality of trust, saying “Configuration management is about saying at any point in time, over a timespan, what is the information I should trust?” MBD is about how you define something, and PLM is about what the right definition is at any moment in time.
Important Factors in MBD/PLM Implementations
Jennifer brings up three important concepts that enterprises should consider when integrating MBD and PLM systems. The first is the clarity of the interface between the two systems, which has to do with standards, details, and communications between them. The second is the user experience (UX) of the information exchange, which she feels should be prioritized above any other goal, because that will lead to the desired ROI benefits. “In my experience,” she says, “people focus on faster, better, cheaper, and then they implement wrong, instead of focusing on the ease of use for the people. That’s the user experience piece.”
Better UX will also fundamentally affect adoption. “If it’s easy, then I will get immediate value and I will adopt it,” she says. “If it’s hard and the value isn’t obvious … the adoption doesn’t happen. I don’t have time for hard.” This leads to the third factor organizations must consider: people. They need their work to be made easier, which will lead to higher quality and faster work. Jonathan summarizes the factors: “Your point is focus on the nexus of things”—ease of use for workers—“and then you’ll get all these outcomes you need. But don’t focus on all the outcomes.”
MBD/PLM: The Chicken and the Egg
Jonathan and Jennifer agree that there is a best implementation order for MBD and PLM—but it’s unique for every enterprise because it depends on where your organization is in its digital transformation. Jonathan says, “Take wherever you are today and work towards more digital management of your product lifecycle—however you do it today.” The real absolute that he sees, however, is that the approach should be iterative.
The trio agree that it’s probably best to be implementing or evolving both your MBD and PLM systems at once, or at least improving each as you discover how it can work with the other one. Jennifer says, “This is what bothers me about PLM and MBD being separate implementations. If you don’t have crosstalk between MBD and PLM, you’ll never get to the creativity you need or the innovation mindset that you need.”
“I think it’s super, super important to keep in mind that this is really dynamic,” she goes on. “People are evolving their understanding of what we should be doing. People are evolving the technologies, which includes how they understand the problems. Therefore the technologies are evolving.” The best implementation solution might be a hybrid, going back and forth between the two, advancing both in parallel, Jen agrues, “Again, considering the people, because that’s where the magic happens.”
Learn More About The MBD/PLM Overlap
The full podcast episode offers many more details including why PLM doesn’t necessarily need MBD, Jennifer’s straightforward process for configuring a release process, why we all shouldn’t be afraid of failing more often, and more.
Check out the full conversation in Stay Sharp Episode 46: The Overlap Between MBD and PLM, and join us each week for a new podcast.
Follow the Razorleaf Podcast, Stay Sharp in Digital Engineering on:
